Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Ann Pharm Fr. 2019 May;77(3):232-240. doi: 10.1016/j.pharma.2019.01.003. Epub 2019 Apr 5.

[Evaluation of dental medical devices: Focus on the definition of needs].

[Article in French]

Author information

1
Unité évaluation et achats des dispositifs médicaux, service évaluations pharmaceutiques et bon usage, Agence générale des équipements et produits de santé (AGEPS), Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux (AP-HP) de Paris, 7, rue du Fer à Moulin, 75005 Paris, France.
2
Service d'odontologie, université Paris-Diderot, hôpital Rothschild, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux (AP-HP) de Paris, 75012 Paris, France.
3
Unité évaluation et achats des dispositifs médicaux, service évaluations pharmaceutiques et bon usage, Agence générale des équipements et produits de santé (AGEPS), Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux (AP-HP) de Paris, 7, rue du Fer à Moulin, 75005 Paris, France; Unité évaluation scientifique, bon usage et information, service évaluations pharmaceutiques et bon usage, Agence générale des équipements et produits de santé (AGEPS), Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux (AP-HP) de Paris, 75005 Paris, France; Inserm UMR S 1145, faculté de pharmacie, université Paris Descartes - Sorbonne Paris cité, institut droit et santé, 75006 Paris, France.
4
Unité évaluation et achats des dispositifs médicaux, service évaluations pharmaceutiques et bon usage, Agence générale des équipements et produits de santé (AGEPS), Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux (AP-HP) de Paris, 7, rue du Fer à Moulin, 75005 Paris, France. Electronic address: christel.duhamel@aphp.fr.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

As a university teaching hospital, the call for tender for dental medical devices (dental implants and consumables) is done with the help of a team of hospital pharmacists and users. In order to optimize the definition of needs and evaluation criteria, an exhaustive review of the products was carried out.

METHODS:

Dental medical devices suppliers were consulted in 2017 for reviewing their products. Their technical, clinical and economic data were compared. The products have been gathered into categories and its results had been submitted to a commission of dental experts of our university hospital for clinical opinion.

RESULTS:

More than 30,000 references from 30 different suppliers were analyzed (orthodontics, dental implants, membranes and bone substitutes, various dental consumables). Relating to oral implantology, the opinions converged on clinical studies. On the contrary, diverging opinions have been proffered on the systematic use of single-use drills and customized guides for surgery and on the implant's choice. The definition of needs has been specified for orthodontics and consumables. Other criteria played a great role: single packaging (unit doses), product's sterility, paediatric needs, presence of allergens, traceability of devices and supplier diversity.

CONCLUSIONS:

This review led to the identification of new needs in more precise terms. The complexity and diversity of dental products and techniques requires this careful review and a better collaboration with practitioners.

KEYWORDS:

Appel d’offres; Call for tender; Dentaire; Dental; Dispositifs médicaux; Marchés publics; Medical devices; Orthodontics; Orthodontie; Public procurement

PMID:
30961889
DOI:
10.1016/j.pharma.2019.01.003
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center